Cargando…

The transition from amalgam to other restorative materials in the U.S. predoctoral pediatric dentistry clinics

Increased concerns about the safety of amalgam restorations in children have resulted in many dental schools emphasizing the teaching of alternative dental materials. This study investigated the current teaching of different dental materials for use in posterior teeth in the United States predoctora...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kateeb, Elham T., Warren, John J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6704025/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31452952
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cre2.196
_version_ 1783445418803200000
author Kateeb, Elham T.
Warren, John J.
author_facet Kateeb, Elham T.
Warren, John J.
author_sort Kateeb, Elham T.
collection PubMed
description Increased concerns about the safety of amalgam restorations in children have resulted in many dental schools emphasizing the teaching of alternative dental materials. This study investigated the current teaching of different dental materials for use in posterior teeth in the United States predoctoral pediatric dentistry programs. In 2011, the authors invited the chairs of the predoctoral pediatric dentistry departments in all accredited dental schools at that time (N = 57) to participate in an internet‐based survey. Descriptive statistics were calculated to describe the frequency of using different restorative materials. Regression models were developed to explore the factors related to the use of dental restorations in predoctoral pediatric clinics. Among the 44 dental schools that responded (77% response rate), 74% used amalgam, and 93% used composite in primary posterior teeth. Glass ionomer was used by 61% of the schools in primary posterior teeth. Placing amalgam in primary posterior teeth was associated with programs that treated more 3–5‐year‐old patients (β = .302, p < .043), whereas the use of glass ionomer was associated with having students serving at off‐site satellite dental clinics (β = .015, p < .012). In general, having departments with chairs who had positive attitudes towards Minimal Invasive Dentistry (MID) used composite (β = .091, p < .0001) and glass ionomer (β = 103, p < .0001) more frequently and were less likely to use amalgam (β = −.077, p < .005) in primary posterior teeth. Although teaching MID concepts in predoctoral pediatric clinics in dental schools is increasing, the use of amalgam in posterior primary and permanent teeth is still widely practiced.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6704025
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67040252019-08-26 The transition from amalgam to other restorative materials in the U.S. predoctoral pediatric dentistry clinics Kateeb, Elham T. Warren, John J. Clin Exp Dent Res Original Articles Increased concerns about the safety of amalgam restorations in children have resulted in many dental schools emphasizing the teaching of alternative dental materials. This study investigated the current teaching of different dental materials for use in posterior teeth in the United States predoctoral pediatric dentistry programs. In 2011, the authors invited the chairs of the predoctoral pediatric dentistry departments in all accredited dental schools at that time (N = 57) to participate in an internet‐based survey. Descriptive statistics were calculated to describe the frequency of using different restorative materials. Regression models were developed to explore the factors related to the use of dental restorations in predoctoral pediatric clinics. Among the 44 dental schools that responded (77% response rate), 74% used amalgam, and 93% used composite in primary posterior teeth. Glass ionomer was used by 61% of the schools in primary posterior teeth. Placing amalgam in primary posterior teeth was associated with programs that treated more 3–5‐year‐old patients (β = .302, p < .043), whereas the use of glass ionomer was associated with having students serving at off‐site satellite dental clinics (β = .015, p < .012). In general, having departments with chairs who had positive attitudes towards Minimal Invasive Dentistry (MID) used composite (β = .091, p < .0001) and glass ionomer (β = 103, p < .0001) more frequently and were less likely to use amalgam (β = −.077, p < .005) in primary posterior teeth. Although teaching MID concepts in predoctoral pediatric clinics in dental schools is increasing, the use of amalgam in posterior primary and permanent teeth is still widely practiced. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-06-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6704025/ /pubmed/31452952 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cre2.196 Text en ©2019 The Authors. Clinical and Experimental Dental Research published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Kateeb, Elham T.
Warren, John J.
The transition from amalgam to other restorative materials in the U.S. predoctoral pediatric dentistry clinics
title The transition from amalgam to other restorative materials in the U.S. predoctoral pediatric dentistry clinics
title_full The transition from amalgam to other restorative materials in the U.S. predoctoral pediatric dentistry clinics
title_fullStr The transition from amalgam to other restorative materials in the U.S. predoctoral pediatric dentistry clinics
title_full_unstemmed The transition from amalgam to other restorative materials in the U.S. predoctoral pediatric dentistry clinics
title_short The transition from amalgam to other restorative materials in the U.S. predoctoral pediatric dentistry clinics
title_sort transition from amalgam to other restorative materials in the u.s. predoctoral pediatric dentistry clinics
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6704025/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31452952
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cre2.196
work_keys_str_mv AT kateebelhamt thetransitionfromamalgamtootherrestorativematerialsintheuspredoctoralpediatricdentistryclinics
AT warrenjohnj thetransitionfromamalgamtootherrestorativematerialsintheuspredoctoralpediatricdentistryclinics
AT kateebelhamt transitionfromamalgamtootherrestorativematerialsintheuspredoctoralpediatricdentistryclinics
AT warrenjohnj transitionfromamalgamtootherrestorativematerialsintheuspredoctoralpediatricdentistryclinics